Faculty Bibliography

Background Selection of a vascular pedicle for autologous breast reconstruction is time consuming and depends on visual evaluation during the surgery. Preoperative imaging of donor site for mapping the perforator artery anatomy greatly improves the efficiency of perforator selection and significantly reduces the operative time. In this article, we present our experience with magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) for perforator vessel mapping including MRA technique and interpretation. Methods We have performed over 400 MRA examinations from August 2008 to August 2013 at our institution for preoperative imaging of donor site for mapping the perforator vessel anatomy. Using our optimized imaging protocol with blood pool magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents, multiple donor sites can be imaged in a single MRA examination. Following imaging using the postprocessing and reporting tool, we estimated incidence of commonly used perforators for autologous breast reconstruction. Results In our practice, anterior abdominal wall tissue is the most commonly used donor site for perforator flap breast reconstruction and deep inferior epigastric artery perforators are the most commonly used vascular pedicle. A thigh flap, based on the profunda femoral artery perforator has become the second most used flap at our institution. In addition, MRA imaging also showed evidence of metastatic disease in 4% of our patient subset. Conclusion Our MRA technique allows the surgeons to confidently assess multiple donor sites for the best perforator and flap design. In conclusion, a well-performed MRA with specific postprocessing provides an accurate method for mapping perforator vessel, at the same time avoiding ionizing radiation.

BACKGROUND: Although bone repair is often a relatively rapid and efficient process, many bone defects do not heal. Because an adequate blood supply is essential for new bone formation, we hypothesized that augmenting new blood vessel formation by increasing the number of circulating vasculogenic progenitor cells (PCs) with AMD3100 and enhancing their trafficking to the site of injury with recombinant human parathyroid hormone (rhPTH) will improve healing. METHODS: Critical-sized 3-mm cranial defects were trephined into the right parietal bone of C57BLKS/J 6 mice (N = 120). The mice were divided into 4 equal groups (n = 30 for each). The first group received daily subcutaneous injections of AMD3100 (5 mg/kg). The second group received daily subcutaneous injections of rhPTH (5 mg/kg). The third group received both AMD3100 and rhPTH. The fourth group received subcutaneous injections of saline. Circulating vasculogenic PC numbers, new blood vessel formation, and bony regeneration were assessed. Progenitor cell adhesion, migration, and tubule formation were assessed in the presence of rhPTH and AMD3100. RESULTS: Flow cytometry demonstrated that combination therapy significantly increased the number of circulating PCs compared with all other groups. In vitro, AMD3100-treated PCs had significantly increased adhesion migration, and tubule formation was assessed in the presence of rhPTH. Combination therapy significantly improved new blood vessel formation in those with cranial defect compared with all other groups. Finally, bony regeneration was significantly increased in the combination therapy group compared with all other groups. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of a PC-mobilizing and traffic-enhancing agent improved bony regeneration of calvarial defects in mice.

PURPOSE: This study compared the biomechanical behavior of tilted long implant and vertical short implants to support fixed prosthesis in an atrophic maxilla. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The maxilla model was built based on a tomographic image of the patient. Implant models were based on micro-computer tomography imaging of implants. The different configurations considered were M4S, four vertical anterior implants; M4T, two mesial vertical implants and two distal tilted (45 degrees ) implants in the anterior region of the maxilla; and M6S, four vertical anterior implants and two vertical posterior implants. Numerical simulation was carried out under bilateral 150 N loads applied in the cantilever region in axial (L1) and oblique (45 degrees ) (L2) direction. Bone was analyzed using the maximum and minimum principal stress (sigmamax and sigmamin ), and von Mises stress (sigmavM ) assessments. Implants were analyzed using the sigmavM . RESULTS: The higher sigmamax was observed at: M4T, followed by M6S/L1, M6S/L2, M4S/L2, and M4S/L1 and the higher sigmavM : M4T/L1, M4T/L2 and M4S/L2, M6S/L2, M4S/L1, and M6S/L1. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of distal tilted (all-on-four) and distal short implants (all-on-six) resulted in higher stresses in both situations in the maxillary bone in comparison to the presence of vertical implants (all-on-four).

BACKGROUND: To decrease the rate of infectious complications, surgeons have begun to use Biopatch (Ethicon, Somerville, N.J.) disks at drain exit sites. The authors investigated whether use of a Biopatch disk could convey a reduction in perioperative infections in patients undergoing immediate tissue expander breast reconstruction. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of all patients undergoing tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction from November of 2010 to November of 2012 at a single institution. Breasts were divided into two cohorts: controls with traditional adhesive dressings and those with Biopatch disks at drain sites. Breasts were compared based on demographics, complications, drain duration, and antibiotic type. RESULTS: A total of 1211 breasts met inclusion criteria. The control group (November of 2010 to October of 2011) included 606 breasts. The Biopatch cohort (November of 2011 to October of 2012) included 605 breasts. When comparing breasts with disks to controls, there were no statistical differences in overall infection (6.2 versus 7.4 percent; p = 0.4235), major infection (4.0 versus 4.3 percent; p = 0.8853), need for explantation (2.2 versus 1.8 percent; p = 0.5372), and mastectomy skin flap necrosis (12.6 versus 14.6 percent; p = 0.3148). However, age greater than 50 years, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, obesity, history of prior breast irradiation, and mastectomy skin flap necrosis were independent predictors of infectious complications. CONCLUSIONS: Biopatch disks do not reduce the rate infectious complications in patients undergoing immediate tissue expander breast reconstruction. Other conventional risks, including medical comorbidities, obesity, and mastectomy skin flap necrosis, remain significantly associated with infectious complications. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

Diabetic patients exhibit dysfunction of the normal wound healing process, leading to local ischemia by vascular occlusive disease as well as sustained increases in the proinflammatory cytokines and overproduction of reactive oxygen species (ROS). Of the many sources of ROS, the enzyme xanthine oxidase (XO) has been linked to overproduction of ROS in diabetic environment and studies have demonstrated that treatment with XO inhibitors decreases XO overactivity and XO-generated ROS. This study evaluates the role of XO in the diabetic wound and the impact of specifically inhibiting its activity on wound healing. Treatment of diabetic wounds with siXDH (xanthine dehydrogenase siRNA) decreased XDH mRNA expression by 51.6%, XO activity by 35.9%, ROS levels by 78.1%, and pathologic wound burden by 31.5%, and accelerated wound healing by 7 days (23.3%). PCR analysis demonstrated that increased XO activity in wild type wound may be due to XDH to XO conversion and/or XO phosphorylation, but not to gene transcription, whereas increased XO activity in diabetic wounds may also be from gene transcription. These results suggest that XO may be responsible for large proportion of elevated oxidative stress in the diabetic wound environment and that normalizing the metabolic activity of XO using targeted delivery of siXDH may decrease overproduction of ROS and accelerate wound healing in diabetic patients.

BACKGROUND: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requires accredited fellowship programs to exhibit proficiency in six broadly defined domains; however, core competencies specifically mandated for hand surgery training have yet to be established. Several studies have demonstrated significant disparities in exposure to essential skills and knowledge between orthopedic surgery- and plastic surgery-based hand surgery fellowship programs. To determine whether significant discrepancies also exist after fellowship between hand surgeons trained in orthopedic surgery and those trained in plastic surgery, clinical practice patterns were evaluated. METHODS: A 20-question survey was created and distributed electronically to American Society for Surgery of the Hand and American Association for Hand Surgery members. Responses were compared using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Nine hundred eighty-two hand surgeons (76 percent orthopedic and 24 percent plastic) responded, representing a 39 percent response rate. Most plastic surgery hand practices were academic-based (41 percent), whereas orthopedic practices were private (67 percent). More orthopedic hand surgeons worked in multipractitioner practices than plastic surgeons (54 percent versus 30 percent; p < 0.0001). Orthopedic hand surgeons performed a higher percentage of hand cases in their practice facilities (86 percent versus 71 percent; p < 0.0001). Plastic surgeons performed more congenital hand (56 percent versus 35 percent; p < 0.05) and digital replantation cases (53 percent versus 22 percent; p < 0.05) but treated significantly fewer open reduction and internal fixation distal radius fractures. CONCLUSIONS: Orthopedic and plastic surgery hand surgeons differ significantly in their clinical practice patterns. Differences in clinical exposure during training are reflected in practice and persist over time. Referral patterns and practice situations are also contributors to ultimate practice patterns.

PURPOSE: The probability of survival of implant-supported prostheses may be affected by the interplay between different implant diameters supporting screwed or cemented crowns. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of implant diameter and prosthesis retention system on the reliability and failure modes of single crowns. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Internal-hexagon implants were divided into six groups (n = 21 each) according to implant diameter (3.3, 4.0, or 5.0 mm) and crown retention system (screwed or cemented). Abutments were torqued to the implants, and crowns were then fixed and subjected to step-stress accelerated life testing in water. Use-level probability Weibull curves and reliability for missions of 50,000 cycles at 100, 150, and 200 N were calculated. Failure analysis was performed. RESULTS: Cemented systems presented higher reliability than screwed ones, except between 3.3-mm-diameter cemented and screwed systems at a load of 100 or 150 N. Failure modes were restricted to the abutment screw and varied with implant diameter only in the cement-retained groups. CONCLUSION: Higher reliability was observed for cement-retained crowns and implants of larger diameter compared to screw-retained and smaller diameter. Failure modes differed between groups.

Obtaining an esthetic and functional primary surgical repair in patients with complete cleft lip and palate (CLP) can be challenging because of tissue deficiencies and alveolar ridge displacement. This study aimed to describe surgeons' assessments of presurgical deformity and predicted surgical outcomes in patients with complete unilateral and bilateral CLP (UCLP and BCLP, respectively) treated with and without nasoalveolar molding (NAM). Cleft surgeon members of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association completed online surveys to evaluate 20 presurgical photograph sets (frontal and basal views) of patients with UCLP (n = 10) and BCLP (n = 10) for severity of cleft deformity, quality of predicted surgical outcome, and likelihood of early surgical revision. Five patients in each group (UCLP and BCLP) received NAM, and 5 patients did not receive NAM. Surgeons were masked to patient group. Twenty-four percent (176/731) of surgeons with valid e-mail addresses responded to the survey. For patients with UCLP, surgeons reported that, for NAM-prepared patients, 53.3% had minimum severity clefts, 58.9% were anticipated to be among their best surgical outcomes, and 82.9% were unlikely to need revision surgery. For patients with BCLP, these percentages were 29.8%, 38.6%, and 59.9%, respectively. Comparing NAM-prepared with non-NAM-prepared patients showed statistically significant differences (P < 0.001), favoring NAM-prepared patients. This study suggests that cleft surgeons assess NAM-prepared patients as more likely to have less severe clefts, to be among the best of their surgical outcomes, and to be less likely to need revision surgery when compared with patients not prepared with NAM.

BACKGROUND: Practitioners who are not board-certified by the American Board of Plastic Surgery are practicing cosmetic surgery. The extent of this issue across the United States has yet to be examined in detail. METHODS: A systematic search using Google was performed to evaluate the qualifications of clinicians marketing themselves as plastic surgeons. For every U.S. state, the following searches were performed: [state] plastic surgery, [state] cosmetic surgery, and [state] aesthetic surgery. The first 50 Web sites returned for each search were visited and scrutinized using the American Society of Plastic Surgeons and American Board of Plastic Surgery Web sites. RESULTS: In total, 7500 Web sites were visited, yielding 2396 board-certified plastic surgeons (77.9 percent of all practitioners). There were 284 board-certified ear, nose, and throat surgeons, 61 (21.5 percent) of whom practice outside their scope; 106 board-certified general surgeons, 100 (94.3 percent) of whom practice outside their scope; 104 board-certified oral and maxillofacial surgery surgeons, 68 (65.4 percent) of whom practice outside their scope; 70 board-certified ophthalmologists/oculoplastic surgeons, 49 (70 percent) of whom practice outside their scope; and 74 board-certified dermatologists, 36 (48.6 percent) of whom practice outside their scope. There were also 16 internal medicine doctors, 13 obstetrics and gynecology physicians, six emergency medicine physicians, three pediatricians, two urologists, two anesthesiologists, and finally one phlebotomist; all of these practitioners practice outside their scope as defined by Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education core competencies. CONCLUSIONS: Many clinicians performing cosmetic surgery are not board-certified. This finding has important implications for patient safety.